Is the new F10 M5 with the twin turbo S63tu V8 underrated? PP-P performance says the car puts out 573 horses

Is the new F10 M5 with the twin turbo S63tu V8 underrated? PP-P performance says the car puts out 573 horses

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Is the new F10 M5 with the twin turbo S63tu V8 underrated? PP-P performance says the car puts out 573 horses

PP-P Performance put up a dyno vide of the new F10 M5 on their dyno dynamics. The car put down 444 horsepower to the wheels (we are trying to get the graph) and PP-P based on their baseline corrected this out to 573 horsepower. Is the M5 putting out more than the 560 horsepower BMW rated it at? We would think it pretty much has to as the X5M with all wheel drive, less boost, and lower compression is rated at 555 horsepower. The F10 M5 routing its power to the rear wheels through a more efficient dual clutch drivetrain with more boost is likely much stronger. This dyno run is just the first solid evidence we have to prove it.

So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.

So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.

No, I'm saying this is the first solid evidence of it being underrated. By how much I don't know I'm simply stating it is.

So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.

I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.

I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.

I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.

Plus, the header said for 364 days a year, the M5 is better....after that, I got bored by how boring looking the Merc is...so I stopped reading....what day was the one day, that the amg was better?